Proposed legislation to make file sharing a felony

In response to this crazy news story.

This is goofy gubment at work again (see H.R 2517).  This kind of action will have a dramatic chilling effect on technology innovation.

In my humble opinion, file sharing is a fascinating innovation and might otherwise become an important collaboration tool of our hi-tech world. 
I want to be able to share my discoveries and developments with my peers so all can benefit. 
Copyright laws need to fairly serve the public first, and the producers second. 
Studios, networks, artists and their support organizations need to be in step with progress through technology and innovation -- and not suppress it!

But this is
obviously NOT about the artists. It's much more about the money-hungry associations, licensing companies, networks and studios. 
The actual artists, whom 'they' claim to serve, get almost nothing for their
trouble, winding up with a very small chunk of what the consumers pay for the materials. I'd like to see
artists getting more of the pie, even if it means pushing out the big guys, like the RIAA.

And it's too bad that Napster didn't build in a nominal fee to get
those artists paid, as they should.  I want to help artists and encourage them through my payments. 
But alas, Napster didn't want to do that, so we all have to pay for it.  Legislators ought to take note that people like me want to pay, and in fact would spend more on P2P file sharing than would normally spend on CDs. 
But not $1 a song. More like $3/mo or $100/yr.  At a buck a song, I'd have gone broke! 
And what I want is older music, the stuff that doesn't make money any more. 
60s, 70s and 80s music.  And I'd gladly pay for it -- if there was a way to
do so!

Making criminals of good people here is taking the easy way out.  I suggest to RIAA and others, get creative, do your homework and embrace technology, not thwart it.

-- Danny